In the course of urgent children proceedings, counsel advised solicitors inappropriately to seek judicial review of a court decision. The application was persisted with despite warnings from the respondents that they intended to seek a wasted costs order against the solicitor and counsel personally. Such an order was made, and appealed.
Held: The proposition that a solicitor who acts on counsel’s advice must bear responsibility for that advice in all circumstances cannot be supported. Earlier orders had not been entirely correctly obtained. The local authority had made a decision which would have made any proceedings unnecessary, but did not communicate it to the solicitors. The order against the solicitor could not stand. Similarly the procedure for claiming an order against counsel had not been followed. Both orders were set aside.
The Master Of The Rolls (Lord Woolf) Lord Justice Aldous Lord Justice Chadwick
[1996] EWHC Admin 368
Bailii
Supreme Court Act 1981 51, Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 4
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Ridehalgh v Horsefield; Allen v Unigate Dairies Ltd CA 26-Jan-1994
Guidance for Wasted Costs Orders
Guidance was given on the circumstances required for the making of wasted costs orders against legal advisers. A judge invited to make an order arising out of an advocate’s conduct of court proceedings must make full allowance for the fact that an . .
Cited – Locke v Camberwell Health Authority CA 23-May-1991
The court discussed the relative duties of solicitor and counsel. Taylor LJ set out the principles that: 1) In general a solicitor, is entitled to rely upon the advice of counsel properly instructed;
2) For a solicitor, without special . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 02 July 2021; Ref: scu.136916
